It seems silly to me that a person cannot use Longarms skill to fire single shots from an assault rifle, nor Pistol skill to fire single shots from a machine pistol; also a bit silly that one can be very skilled with assault rifle and no clue how to fire a sport rifle, or vice versa. (Once you know how to use sights, that knowlege applies to pretty much any weapon fired over open sights, eh?) Here's a stab at an alternate system. I'm open to thoughts on game balance, and interested in hearing from people who have experience learning to fire various weapons.

Handgun: this is the skill of firing a weapon with a pistol-style grip with arm at full extension. This is the primary skill for firing pistols and machine pistols. It is the only skill with which one can use the two-gun (split dicepool) action. It is possible to fire other weapons holding them only by the pistol-style grip, including most shotguns and assault rifles, but rarely practical; the STR Min rules represent this much better than rules in which only autofire weapons have recoil. Modifiers for a stock do not apply when using this skill.

Hip fire: this is the skill of firing a weapon from the hip. This is the primary skill for firing SMGs and assault rifles. Most shotguns and carbines can be hip-fired. Most pistols and similar weapons are too short for use with this skill, as are some sawed-off shotguns. Modifiers for a shockpad do not apply when using this skill, though a stock is usually required for bracing the weapon against one's hip. Visual magification (and telescopic sights) cannot be used when hip-firing.

Shoulder fire: this is the skill of firing a weapon in a traditional stock-against-shoulder grip. This is the primary skill for firing most longarms eg sport rifles, sniper rifles and shotguns. It is also a valid way to fire assault rifles and carbines, and pistols, machine pistols and SMGs when using an extendable stock. It requires a more fixed position, so Reaction rolls to avoid attacks are halved when shoulder-firing. It is the only skill usable while firing from a prone position, and the only way to benefit from a bipod.

Any of these skills can take a specialization of either Autofire or Single-Shot.

I haven't yet touched on Heavy Weapons. I'm not at all persuaded that the skill of firing an underbarrel grenade launcher, a Striker rocket and a tripod-mounted machine gun are the same skill.

I like the idea of having multiple "stances" for firearms, but I wouldn't really think they're two different skills, per se. Hip fire and shoulder fire need different statistical advantages, too.

I think the best idea for this I have heard is to rearange the weapons categories for the Firearms Group into Small Arms, Long Arms, and Heavy Weapons.

The only really problematic weapon for some people might be the submachine gun. All others pretty much fit logically into one of those categories.

I thought anything man-portable was small arms.

Yeah yeah. That's just playing semantics. I am sure most people can figure out that small arms in this instance means pistols and the like. Feel free to suggest another name if you like. As I said, (or at least implied) in my last post, the idea was not not mine (as in I didn't give the categories their names), and I was just reposting it here as something that, in my opinion, was worth consideration, given the subject of the thread.

Should I edit the post to say ... Little Guns, Medium Guns, and Big Guns?

I use the system Fortune's talking about, 'cept I called it sidearms, small arms and heavy/special weapons... I think we even discussed it before, actually, and I'm pretty sure it's my idea he's talking about.

Anyway, the whole thing has a few effects that I like:

1. People can only use at most 2 weapons at any one given time and they still have to pay the nuyen to own the weapons in the first place, so it doesn't really end up being overpowered, it just gives people the opportunity to bring the right tool for the right job more often, which is something I actively try to encourage in my gameworld. Enticing people to take the whole group means I'm more likely to see flechette loaded sport rifles when the group's hunting paracritters in the NAN territories, SMGs when they're storming a gang hideout, holdouts in the middle of a night club brawl and Aztechnology Strikers when they're paid to blow up a wealthy exec's fancy new mega yacht or private jet. I think this does good things for immersion.

2. Believe it or not, it ends up resulting in smaller dicepools over all, for the most part, since people can no longer just bump Automatics up to 6 and depend on Machine pistols and palming for concealability. While this does tend to force them to spend points on more than a single firearm skill in general, they can't complain too much because each skill is arguably better off than it was before and the whole group encompasses damn near everything.

*Disclaimer: I don't think the current RAW list is broken or anything crazy like that, I just always intended this as the most benign houserule possible. It's really a flavor thing, and if you're running a street level campaign I can definitely see why you wouldn't really want to encourage a houserule that treats the ability to use Panther Cannons as just another run of the mill skill.

If you are going for a more "real-life" approach, a good way to divide up the skills is thus:

Handguns: Use this skill when firing pistols, machine pistols, and SMGs that are fired like pistols.

Assault Weapons: Use this skill when firing assault rifles, carbines, shotguns, and SMGs fired from the shoulder. Also, if you are using a sport/sniper rifle and firing with iron sights, or without any magnifying optics.

Riflery: Use this skill when firing carbines, assault rifles, sport rifles, and sniper rifles when using a magnifying optic and at further than short range.


As for machineguns...I believe it should be a separate skill. Mechanically, it has some similarity to using assault weapons, but the principles behind getting the most bang for your buck are totally different. And "Heavy Weapons" is a poor name. "Machineguns" is probably better.

Perhaps something like 'non-automatic heavy weapons' since GLs RLs and PCs all share the fact that they are overly large and only fire one shot at a time (As opposed to burst or full auto) I always thought it was funny that the same skill that governs machine guns also governs rocket launcers, but oh well.

Another idea would be to utilise Skill groups.

Have something like a reverse speciality for skill groups.

Someone with points in Pistols (the Firearms group), would also be able to use the other skills in that group, with thier Pistol skill and an appropriate minus (I donno, -2/-3?).

I would catagorize weapon skills by the way the weapon is used.

Pistol - Unbraced, 1-2 handed firing. Includes pistols, machine pistols, and SMGs fired without using shoulder stocks.

Rifle - fired with 3-point support (shoulder, 2 hands). Includes everything from stocked machine pistols to LMGs on bipods.

From this general base, you include familiarity and specialized training.

Familiarity is the way a firearm feels. A SMG and an assault rifle are used essentially the same way, (stock to shoulder, look down the sights, squeeze trigger) but have a different feel to them. I believe an expert shot with a SMG would start out so-so on an assault rifle, but would improve very quickly. This is because he is not learning new skills, but learning how to apply existing skills to a new weapon. Perhaps start at half skill for an unfamiliar weapon, and add a die per day of training with the new weapon.

Specialized training acts like weapon skill, but is based on the situation, not the weapon. For example, a sniper may have Rifle 3/marksman 2. This would mean in general circumstances the shooter throws 3 dice, but gets an extra 2 when he is prone (or otherwise supported) and shooting at a distant target. Another soldier might have Rifle 3/CQB 2. Here he gets 3 dice in general circumstances, and an extra 2 when he chases a flashbang into a room and shoots everyone inside.

Not a fan of combining Pistols and Machine Pistols into one category, because those are very different skills from a shooting perspective.

The reality is that autoweapons and non-autoweapons are pretty different firing skills - I'm a pretty good shot, but I've handled a machine pistol once and it was a disaster.

I would consider splitting them up as follows

Handguns - single shot
Machine Pistols & Subguns
Assault Rifles & Rifles
Heavy

I wouldn't bother splitting them up at all. Let people use Pistols to fire a MP on semi if they want, let them use Long Arms to fire an AR on semi if they want. SMG's could really go either way... I'd probably go with Long Arms for a stocked SMG and Pistols for a non-stocked.

I'm quite good with semiautomatic AR-15 and FAL type rifles. I've got exactly zero training with automatic rifles of the exact same type, and were I handed one in a dangerous situation, I can't imagine moving the selector past the semiautomatic position... why make a gun you know how to use shoot differently?

One of the big things to note with Shadowrun, though, is that what most of us are used to thinking of in terms of what's easy to get (semiauto) and what's not (automatic... want to talk paperwork to try and own one legally, at least in the parts of the US where you still can?). My impression of 2073 is that if you can get through the paperwork to buy a Fichetti, there's just a couple of extra forms to fill out if you wanted a 227-X instead.

I agree with Hellhound that semiauto handguns should be kept seperate from machine pistols and submachine guns. I've fired my 9mm glock for a couple years and was pretty comfortable with it, but when I tried my friend's tiny little 9mm Uzi thing it scared the crap out of me. It didn't look powerful at all, in fact it looked a lot like the pictures of machine pistols in the SR book, but I definitely had to fire it from my shoulder, there's no way I'd be able to fire it freehanded. Maybe if I spent more time with it or fired a .22 version, I would get used to the kick, but from that brief experience, it seemed like a whole different animal to me. Maybe the game needs Strength mins for weapons?

Several people mentioned grouping machine pistols, submachine guns, and assault rifles together into one group, and that makes sense to me. I've never fired an assault rifle, but I'm told they are very much like a submachine gun (in fact they were essentially designed to be long-barreled, rifle-stock submachine guns). Since the professionals are saying they should be grouped together, I'll go with that.

It seems to me that computer assisted weapons like missiles and computer controlled vehicle mounted weapons (including small arms and machine guns) should be able to be fired with no skill. The computer brain of the weapon system seems to be the controlling factor there.

It sounds like we need a weapons group called "Launchers" that includes grenade launchers, rocket propelled grenade launchers, and MP cannons like the panther. But it still sounds to me that machine guns need to be kept separate from those weapons.

I've never fired a machine gun, but from the posts here it seems like bipod/tripod weapons are fired in a very similar way to bolted-down vehicle swivel-mounted weapons. Should there be a weapon group called "Gunnery" that includes bipod-fired machine guns and any bolted-down weapon? For example, using Gunnery skill you can fire machine guns and sniper rifles from a prone position using a bipod. Using Gunnery, you can also fire any small arms weapon, including submachine guns and assault rifles if those weapons are mounted on a bipod or are vehicle mounted. What do the professional warfighters in the forum say?

So to summarize, this is what I'm thinking of house ruling (and maybe this is overly complicated):

Individual Skills:
• Handguns: any semiauto, single-handed weapon (inc. semiauto-switched machine pistols and semiauto-switched single-handed submachine guns). (essentially the same as the current Pistols skill)
  
• Assault Weapons: any two-hand (or 3 point) fired weapon including fully automatic switched machine pistols, submachine guns, and assault rifles. Also includes shotguns and rifles fired without a scope.
  
• Riflery: any semiauto or single shot long arm that is shot using a scope such as rifles, shotguns, and assault rifles fired using a scope.
  
• Launchers: any grenade launcher, rocket propelled grenade launcher, or MP cannon (such as a Panther).
  
• Gunnery: any machine gun or small arm fired from a bipod, tripod, or fixed/vehicle mount.
  
• Computer Controlled Weapons: no skill needed to fire missiles and other computer controlled weapons. The drone brain's skill is used to determine hit success.

Skill Groups:
• Small Arms Group: includes Handguns, Assault Rifles, and Riflery.
• Heavy Weapons Group: includes Launchers and Gunnery weapons.

I am in no way a fan of breaking up the Firearms skills even more. In my opinion, theere should be one less overall skill, not three more.

Currently, learning how to use all smallarms well (3 skills) is more difficult than learning to be a doctor (first aid and medicine).

----------

The problem with allowing skill group defaulting is that you no longer need the skill group itself:

If you allow defaulting at -2, then you can pay 24 cp for one skill at 6, and effectively get the skill group at 4. Defaulting at -3 still means that the skill level at 6 is cheaper than the whole group at 3, and defaulting at -4 is sort pointless.

As you can tell from my earlier post, I'm in the same boat with Fortune and Crusher Bob here. I don't give two shits about the reality of training with firearms, I care about characters and what their role in the group is and how I as a GM can facilitate and balance how they go about their particular area of expertise. "I shoot good" is already an inherently narrow niche; the firearm and close combat skills are all fairly redundant relative to the other skills they share an umbrella with since they all are used to kill things and Shadowrun isn't terribly granular. This often leads players to the rather reasonable conclusion that they should just grab one skill from each skill (90% of the time it's Pistols or Automatics and Blades or Unarmed; there always seems to be one unloved black sheep in these sad trifectas), a pinch of Palming and call it a day, which I think sucks rather badly. The reasoning behind my "side arms", "small arms" and "heavy weapons" division had a bit to do with reality but more than anything it came about from one simple thought exercise revolving around one question: "How can I simultaneously encourage people to use a wide array of weapons and discourage always taking 6 Automatics skills while still preventing weapon specialists from being incredibly narrow point sinks?"

I'm guessing that a lot of the reason they split up the skills is for flavor reasons. Killing people = lots of fun. Fixing people = not so much. Therefore weapons skills are tweaked to the nth degree, but doctor skills are just rolled up into a couple of skills. Realistically Data Search should have been rolled into the Computer skill, but they want the game to emphasize that particular aspect of computer use therefore it's made a separate skill. I'm just guessing here on the creator's philosophy, maybe it was just sloppy game design...

....WR, good points & this also applies (if not more) to melee. This is why the Short One (#102) has her Fists (Killing Hands w/Elemental Strike), Survival knives, and her Katana. Not every fight will be out in the open or a big warehouse.

This is also why I feel why the Dodge skill is still useful, for if in tight quarters (such as a lift or crowded room with a lot of obstacles) Gymnastics ain't going to do you much good.

KK, I'm guessing you are replying to me since I didn't find any posts by Wounded Ronin in this thread.

Man, one of us is going to have to change our name to stop the confusion.


Back on topic...KK, you are dead on. To me, part of the fun in table-top RPGs is trying to gather enough intel to anticipate which tools will serve you best in any given situation. A rule system should give value to almost all choices, depending upon the circumstances, and one choice shouldn't be universally better than another.

A simple solution to simulate the efficiency of a given weapon at different ranges how about a dicepool modifier?

The regular range modifier is (if i remember) 0/-1/-2/-3. Perhaps a modifier per weapon type should add or retract from this.

A shoulder fired weapon like a regular sports rifle/sniper rifle should perhaps get a -1 at short range and a +1 to long range. The problem is also that "short" range of said weapons can be rather long range. Pistols for example are easier to wield in close confinements and should perhaps gain a +1 at short and a -1 at long range. SMG's could have a binus at short/medium but more severe modifiers due to being innacurate at longer range.

Perhaps something like this?
Pistols: Short:+2 / Extreme: -2
SMG: Short:+1 / Extreme: -1
Assault Rifles: Short: -1 / Medium: +1
Rifles: Short: -2 / Extreme: +2
Shotguns: Short: +2 / Extreme: -2

Situational modifiers
Attacker fighting in cramped quarters: -1
Attacker using cumbersome weapon: -1

For example, a phanter cannon is large, loud, long and weights a ton (not literally) and weilding it might not be so easy.

Using the phanter cannon inside a cramped area (albeit giving cover) will make it troublesome moving about and aiming the weapon.

The above modifiers would then add to the regular range modifiers so a pistol shooting at extreme range would have a -4 instead of 3 and a bonus of +1D6 at short range.

This would most likely make people choose a weapon that suits the situation instead of lugging around the heaviest weapon they can find, and make smaller weapons a bit more favourable over heavy guns.

My experience indicates that giving situational modifiers for guns doesn't really modify what guns people take into battle simply because you'd have to penalize pretty heavily before branching out into more than one firearm skill and dragging a second gun around is worth the points. Skills are damned expensive and once you can shoot someone well enough to get the job done in most situations there's little reason to take on another skill since you're not really gaining anything that lets you serve an appreciably different function. On the bright side, once you lower the cost of knowing how to use multiple firearms, a lot of people end up bringing appropriate weapons to the table just on sheer principle. Most people want to do what makes the most sense, it's just that sometimes games seem to punish them for it.

The whole skill table in the book is bad joke. You should buy one point of skill (so you are not defaulting) and buy up the attribute instead until you run out of points for attributes. Only then should you even think of buying more skills.

No offense, but I think the skill table is pretty irrelevant. The li'l fluff chart giving you an idea of what skills ratings are common doesn't mean crap because the RAW rarely supports it on a systemic level and most importantly for the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't address the fact that knowing multiple firearm skills is usually a ticket straight to redundancy. Thanks to the way burst fire modes operate automatics and heavy weapons like LMGs and Assault rifles offer far more damage potential than long arms at short ranges through narrow bursts and offer comparable accuracy at long range thanks to wide bursts up until 800 and 550 meters respectively, so sniper rifles really only come into their own at extreme ranges LMGs can't even attempt (and even then they've got competition from HMGs and Panther Cannons). So again, knowing the full group offers some mild advantages in some scenarios, but that doesn't change the fact that it really is rather expensive as well as redundant since each skill just kills people in a slightly different manner in lieu of real diversity. Again, the only real effect I've seen from lowering the cost of firearms and the close combat groups in my games is that I see people bringing a wider variety of (but still roughly equivalent) tools into play more often. Certainly there isn't any more dice or overpowered characters being brought into play; if anything the dice pools end up being smaller as Samurai have less incentive to just go ahead and scoop up 6 automatics. I'm personally fine with all the weapons performing similarly since shadowrun is a goofy setting that learned everything it knows about firearms from John Woo and Chuck Norris films, but in exchange I don't think players should have to keep paying points for knowing the same song in a slightly different arrangement, and lowering the costs seems to be the quickest way towards gaining the appearance of diversity, which frankly, is all I'm really interested in.

Alternatively you can just ignore the stupid table that indicates that trained professionals with three skill can only buy a single success. I really don't understand why people hold the table so sancrosanct. How useful a dicepool of six is varies pretty widely from task to task in the shadowrun world. Equipment modifiers and varying thresholds and the like can go a fair bit towards equalizing things at certain ranges but in exchange they often trivialize easier tasks. At the end of the day you're a lot better off trying to figure out how many dice PCs and NPCs need to be to consistently perform the tasks you plan on them doing rather than consulting the silly table.

Yeah, I agree with the gist of what you're saying in theory, but the darn 10 bps is just too much of a sticking point for me. I think it's rather notable that there's a few other skill groups out there that contain 4 skills yet Firearms only contains 3. For example, at least with the Stealth group you get some demonstrably different skills; you get to sneak around, pick pocket, palm hold outs, shake pursuers and even impersonate body language, so each skill can broaden your role in appreciable ways; you can't just grab impersonation and say "Well, it's just as good as Palming 3/4s of the time". Compare that to Firearms, which only covers three skills that fill roughly the same role and doesn't even really offer comprehensive mastery of all things boomstick, and I think it's fairly reasonable to throw the guy in my group playing an armorer/weapon specialist PC who lovingly packs his own shells (he thinks caseless lacks "soul") a bone.

A quick fix might be adding the heavy weapons skill to the firearms group, since you need heavy weapons to use machine guns, grenade launchers, and similar small arms.

During military service, we rarely shot our assault rifles at full auto. We trained in aimed semi-automatic fire mostly, some rapid aimed semi-automatic fire, double-taps and the three-round-burst mode. Firing the HMG (M2 .50 BMG) was done in short bursts, our sarge went ballistic when one fired a quarter to half of one belt (105 rounds in one belt I think) in one burst once.

Granted, I was in mechanised artillery, not infantry.

But they have!

Common Modular Cyberware Plug-In in combination with a Monofilament-Chainsaw.

And yes, before anyone bitches, I know it is not technically a 'metaphor'. I just couldn't think of better wording at the time.

If he was being engaged from 100 meters away, wouldn't he still be fucked?

Granted, in the urban sprawl of SR, where more fights take place in gas station bathrooms than wide open spaces, this is less of an issue, but its one of the main reason my sammie owns a sport rifle. (I would agree that range in SR should probably be a little bit more punishing. Personally, I would go with -6 at Extreme Range, with Vision Mag reducing that by its rating, so the best you can have is -3 dice. But that's not the meeting we're having right now.)

Instead of changing the skills, I'd be more inclined to change how the weapons apply to them. For an Assault Rifle, fired in BF or FA it'd be the Automatics skill, fired in SA it'd be Longarms. Machine Pistols fired in SA are Light Pistols, fired in BF or FA, their Automatics. But I haven't really thought about this for very long, so it might just cause more problems. (Also, I apologize if anyone has already mentioned this, but I joined late.)

That's how an old CP:2020 supplement (Hardwired, based on the novel of the same name) did it.

You had Long Guns (rifles, assault rifles, and shotguns fired in semi-auto or slower), Pistols (anything one handed, pretty much, fired semi-auto or slower), and Automatics (anything fired in burst or full auto). Voila. That was it.